Spreading the Insanity
So here it is — now we have sellers ripping off bobdjukic to make their auctions look like his and, apparently, to try to weave the same brand of black magic that apparently results in insane prices. And perhaps it works. Take a look at this auction: Miles Davis, Kind of Blue, Columbia 1355. It’s not exactly laid out like one of the bobdjukic auctions, but it’s clearly evocative. And the listing starts with the oh-so-familiar phrase “INSANELY RARE” in all caps, of course. This must be the most widely circulated insanely rare record of all time. The record is graded at near mint minus, whatever that means, and the cover is graded at VG+, which seems highly generous given the obvious ring wear on the front cover and the big signature of a previous owner on the back. But despite whatever flaws we may see in the record and/or the listing, it seems to have that black magic sheen to it and the bidding has already surpassed $260. We didn’t think insanity was a contagious condition, but perhaps we were wrong.
Anyone see a contradiction in this quote from the auction? “INSANELY RARE 1959 MONO RELEASE pressed on the “SIX EYE” COLUMBIA label (see photo). This is the album many consider to be most popular Jazz LP of all time” At least the seller goes by an appropriate name!
check this joker out…
http://www.ebay.com/itm/BLUE-NOTE-1550-HANK-MOBLEY-ART-FARMER-HORACE-SILVER-DOUG-WATKINS-ART-BLAKEY-/351009258541#viTabs_0
another example of a seller being cute, no mention of it being a later liberty reissue…unless i missed it?
i know its the buyers responsibility etc, but as debated on here before, surely some moral code that you don’t try and hood wink buyers? grrrr
if the price stays as low as it is now, the ploy, on this occasion did not work!
Al: a great heading for your last post. I love it.
RE: the Miles Davis, that’s crazy how similar that seller’s layout is to Bob’s. When I first started reading it I thought they might have just copied and pasted a Bob description for the same record!
.
RE: Adamski, to me that record is clearly not original because of the UA label, and I think anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of Blue Note will realize that. As I’ve said in the past, I don’t think there’s any need to scream “UNITED ARTISTS PRESSING” in the title or listing, as long as the seller doesn’t lie. I don’t think you can expect sellers to do every single thing they can to inform buyers when those things will also potentially drive down the price. For example, if a buyer has a lot of money and will bid high on this record but they don’t have the wherewithal to tell the difference between an original and a UA pressing, why would a seller want to bring the distinction to the attention of a buyer like this? Let the buyer figure that stuff out on their own.
A seller is not REQUIRED to do anything except not lie. A responsible seller will do more – including a reasonably complete description of the item. This as a minimum, IMHO would include whether the LP is an original pressing or not.
Yes, a careful buyer will gather all data before buying, but this does not remove the responsible seller’s obligation to be as complete as possible.
Al-anyone who pays close to $500 for a copy IN THIS CONDITION(ring wear,writing on rear,crinkle corner)obviously has more money than brai–hmm,lets make that “patience”.And if saying something is “insanely rare” is the key to drawing big bidders,I can hardly wait to list some of my MEGA-RARE UA/Blue Note issues. Don’t forget…Ceedee’s prices–are INSANE!!!
Hi Al,
While we are all at it…….
http://www.ebay.com/itm/LEE-MORGAN-City-Lights-BLUE-NOTE-Original-LP-1575-SUPERB/380852213432?_trksid=p2047675.c100011.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20232%26meid%3D5239250229893578822%26pid%3D100011%26prg%3D8938%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D10%26sd%3D390783114052
Someone spent $200 on a UA Hank Mobley 1550? Excuse the language but WTF? I paid $23 for it roughly a year ago! The hell with Stocks and Bonds. The Wolf Of UA Blue note, here I come!! I can see me trying to Close a sucker on ebay and everyone laughing behind me.. HAHAHHA
Joseph: That City Lights auction looks legit to me, it’s an Atomic Records auction and that a pretty rare record…?
Agree with DG Mono…Morgan’s City Lights
thats a damn fine record,
which understandably will fetch top corn.
AL, did you get one in the Baltimore score?
If ‘Kind of Blue’ is an ‘insanely rare’ record: What about Blue Note 1568 then? Probably a discription like this: ‘This record is so rare that even Hank never saw a copy of it’ (sigh)
The City Lights is a 1st pressing if it has one side NY23. This copy does not. It’s the same deal as with the 1568 & 1577, if you go by Fred’s book. These records with the NY23 are extremely rare, but often copies with the W63 address on both sides are popping up and are apparently considered 1st pressings by some if you look at some prices they fetch. But a City Lights with one label NY23 in M-/M-condition is almost impossible to find. I’m very happy to own a copy.
I like the Miles seller’s claim that his auctions will NEVER include ambiguous language like “barely, fairly insignificant or moderately visually distracting”, but he then describes the record as having “a few superficial sleeve slide marks.” My thesaurus would probably equate ‘insignificant’ with ‘superficial’, but let’s not argue semantics.
Some sellers on EbayUK also forget to mention Liberty,so you havnt got them all with you! As for Miles i got £15 for mine and i was well pleased.
Regarding the number of copies auctionned on Ebay this year, i’d like to name it the most insanely common of all Mobley Blue Notes albums : http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hank-Mobley-Self-Titled-BLP-1560-57-Deep-Groove-LP-/181338498855?pt=Music_on_Vinyl&hash=item2a389de727
Fredrik: good call on City Lights. However, even though I think most collectors are under the assumption that an NY23/W63 mixed label is an original, there is technically no way to prove that a copy with W63 both sides wasn’t pressed at the same time. If you take into consideration that Blue Note probably mixed labels to save on production costs, at some point those NY23 labels had to run out and it probably wasn’t right at the very end of a run, so within the same run, for at least one record there would be two different label combinations.
.
My point is I don’t think there is technically anything wrong with calling a W63 copy of City Lights (or Blue Trane etc.) an original, and IIRC Cohen’s book confirms this somewhere by reiterating what I wrote above. Again, it’s left to the buyer to make their own determination as to how much copies with each label combination are worth and to bid accordingly (fat chance haha).
japhy: So true. If we really want to give the seller a hard time, even the word “few” is ambiguous–meaning: they should be counting each and every scratch and measuring its length to the nearest .001 cm while using calculus to accommodate for the curvature!!
HI Rich,
Oh I know it was Legit. I was just pointing out another big Jazz record that will go for big $$$ and well it did…..although not in the HM 1550 stratosphere !
@Rich. Thank you for this post. As you stated it, it is very important to know that at some period Blue Note used to mix labels, in order to use old label stocks. As, For the 1568, it is impossible to determine that the combination of NY23 / W63rd is the first press, and the W63rd/W63rd are second, because the two combinations were pressed exactly at the same time. It is strictly the same run, even if a combination is rarer than another.
I did get City Lights in the Baltimore score. Both sides West 63rd. I’m thrilled to have it.
Here We go fellas, back to INSANITY!!!!
http://www.ebay.com/itm/FREDDIE-HUBBARD-GOIN-UP-BLUE-NOTE-ORIGINAL-1961-MONO-RVG-EAR-DEEP-GROOVE-JAZZ-LP-/261414975377?pt=Music_on_Vinyl&hash=item3cdd8bf791
Reserve price on a “G” condition Blue note. yes “G” rated and its at $33! Holy moly it just never stops